I'm making a experiment to see how people react to a mockup of a supposed Nikon V3.

I have a V1 and I tried to design a V3 that could match all my needs as a photographer.

The specs would be similar to the V1 but with:

- same sensor as the Sony RX100 II (1″ with 20mp and back-illuminated), trading in-sensor phase-detection for a better resolution, DR and low-light performance only if the contrast autofocus was on par with the Olympus OMD.

- mantain roughly the same size as the V1 (the V2 is a bit chunky in my opinion)

- mantain the simple lines and the sort of "bauhaus aesthetic" of the V1 (I really like it)

- make a smaller battery to make the camera lighter and thinner

- give the body a better grip that would not increase it's volume (I opted for a smooth inner curvature, one of the reasons for a smaller battery too)

- a tiltable EVF would improve the usability and confort of a small camera like this

- finally one thing I tought was very important:
The greatest flaw with the V1 is the lack of immediate control but to include more physical buttons could be a overkill in such a small camera. A touch screen could offer all the controls without taking more space. As shown in the last image, a "quick settings" button could bring a menu with the most important settings. All the settings would be quickly adjusted with a swipe movement or switched to "auto". And even in auto mode one could indicate an interval of minimum and maximum values for the camera to choose.

The design is very nice-looking, and the viewfinder looks great, but personally I would find the grip too thin, and I imagine that it would be uncomfortable to pinch your hand that thin for any length of time. Also, I am not a fan of on-screen controls, as you cannot operate them without taking your eye from the viewfinder (unless you have a very accurate and flexible face!).

Sr.Cordeiro wrote:
I'm making a experiment to see how people react to a mockup of a supposed Nikon V3.

I have a V1 and I tried to design a V3 that could match all my needs as a photographer.

The specs would be similar to the V1 but with:

- same sensor as the Sony RX100 II (1″ with 20mp and back-illuminated), trading in-sensor phase-detection for a better resolution, DR and low-light performance only if the contrast autofocus was on par with the Olympus OMD.

- mantain roughly the same size as the V1 (the V2 is a bit chunky in my opinion)

- mantain the simple lines and the sort of "bauhaus aesthetic" of the V1 (I really like it)

- make a smaller battery to make the camera lighter and thinner

- give the body a better grip that would not increase it's volume (I opted for a smooth inner curvature, one of the reasons for a smaller battery too)

- a tiltable EVF would improve the usability and confort of a small camera like this

- finally one thing I tought was very important:
The greatest flaw with the V1 is the lack of immediate control but to include more physical buttons could be a overkill in such a small camera. A touch screen could offer all the controls without taking more space. As shown in the last image, a "quick settings" button could bring a menu with the most important settings. All the settings would be quickly adjusted with a swipe movement or switched to "auto". And even in auto mode one could indicate an interval of minimum and maximum values for the camera to choose.

If you are OK with the OMD CDAF then why not pick up an m43 camera, which would give you a better sensor. For me the only reason to go for the Nikon 1 line would be the on-chip PDAF which allows good tracking and ability to AF with your existing Nikon F mount lenses.

Yes, but my Nikon V1 sensor often surprises me regarding dynamic range, color and sharpness, it's almost at m43 level really, although from ISO 800 on it really shows it's limitations. But all in all, the image quality is way superior to the typical compact sensors, even to the biggest ones (like the one in the Fuji X10/X20). The big DOF can be a advantage too (I use it mainly for street photography).

There are not enough native lenses

There are not many, but sure there are some interesting ones. I only have two, the basic 10-30mm zoom wich is surprisingly good and the excellent 18,5mm f/1.8 prime. It seems that Nikon is investing more on the long lenses tough (and some a bit overpriced IMHO). The relatively big size of some of them is a bit of a let down too.

The design is very nice-looking, and the viewfinder looks great, but personally I would find the grip too thin, and I imagine that it would be uncomfortable to pinch your hand that thin for any length of time.

Good point there, the body might have to be a bit thicker to be comfortable. Also with a thicker body it could maintain the existing battery model.

Also, I am not a fan of on-screen controls, as you cannot operate them without taking your eye from the viewfinder (unless you have a very accurate and flexible face!).

Honestly I was thinking the "quick settings" on-screen controls to be more useful to quickly set automatic options wich could be very useful for street photography, for example: just set the aperture from f/2.8 to f/8, the shutter to 1/125 to 1/2000 and the ISO from 100 to 800 and shoot away
But I wouldn't discard both frontal and rear dials to set aperture and shutter speed on the fly too.

I used Cinema 4D R12 for modelling, illumination and render. Some of the components were made on Adobe Illustrator and exported to Cinema4D to give them volume. The "quick settings" menu was done in Adobe Illustrator.
I was having a slow afternoon in the design studio where I work and just started to play with this idea.

If you are OK with the OMD CDAF then why not pick up an m43 camera, which would give you a better sensor. For me the only reason to go for the Nikon 1 line would be the on-chip PDAF which allows good tracking and ability to AF with your existing Nikon F mount lenses.

I was looking for a small camera to complement some of the limitations of my Fuji X100 for street photography. I opted for the Nikon V1 because it seemed to me it has the most important differences and similarities to the X100:

Differences:
- fast auto-focus
- super burst mode
- ability to use other lenses like a telephoto or a more versatile zoom
- more DOF

Similarities:
- 3:2 aspect ratio
- silent shutter
- viewfinder

Of course the cheap price was a factor too, I bought a V1 second hand with the 10-30mm zoom and still with one year warranty for less than 200 euro. I recently also bought the Nikkor 18,5mm f/1.8 used for 100 euro.

Yes, but my Nikon V1 sensor often surprises me regarding dynamic range, color and sharpness, it's almost at m43 level really, although from ISO 800 on it really shows it's limitations. But all in all, the image quality is way superior to the typical compact sensors, even to the biggest ones (like the one in the Fuji X10/X20). The big DOF can be a advantage too (I use it mainly for street photography).

There are not many, but sure there are some interesting ones. I only have two, the basic 10-30mm zoom wich is surprisingly good and the excellent 18,5mm f/1.8 prime. It seems that Nikon is investing more on the long lenses tough (and some a bit overpriced IMHO). The relatively big size of some of them is a bit of a let down too.

Good point there, the body might have to be a bit thicker to be comfortable. Also with a thicker body it could maintain the existing battery model.

Honestly I was thinking the "quick settings" on-screen controls to be more useful to quickly set automatic options wich could be very useful for street photography, for example: just set the aperture from f/2.8 to f/8, the shutter to 1/125 to 1/2000 and the ISO from 100 to 800 and shoot away
But I wouldn't discard both frontal and rear dials to set aperture and shutter speed on the fly too....Show more →

I am generally a fan of Q-menus like this, but having two or three physical controls is the best. Aperture, Shutter speed or Exposure Compensation, ISO. Two wheels can work.

Do you use the built-in Cinema 4D renderer? I work for NVIDIA ARC, was mental images, and one of our customers is AT2, who make a Cinema 4D plugin with mental ray

'I think a corner EVF can be problematic to some people, like who have left-eye dominance.' Not true, in fact left side VFs are a bonus for LED people, the camera is more centred and hence easier to hold steady and it's easier to work in crowded places.

Same rationale applies for EVF central location - the best is tilt and centre, something Sony and Leica put on their high end cameras. I have no idea how a RED shooter works with all the camera body hanging out in the breeze to the right of their face, but good for big noses maybe.

carstenw wrote:
Do you use the built-in Cinema 4D renderer? I work for NVIDIA ARC, was mental images, and one of our customers is AT2, who make a Cinema 4D plugin with mental ray

Yes, it was with the built-in renderer. I work at a graphic design studio, 3D isn't really our main thing, but we use Cinema 4D to do mockups of stands and exhibitions, a work that doesn't require so much realism. To be honest, the often tight deadlines don't even give me the opportunity to do a proper lighting of the scene. But I've always been curious with third-party renderers, the results I've seen are surely impressive, maybe one day